A Review Of Arbitration CAS 2008/A/1545:Anderson Et Al.vs.IOC

International Sports Arbitration Court(Court of Arbitration for Sports, CAS), design a verdict on a international Sports dispute Arbitration. In general, only when both sides decided to submit the case to the international sports arbitration court’s case, the international sports arbitration court that has jurisdiction. Anderson and v of the international Olympic committee(CAS / 2008 A / 2008) is one of the appeals of the international sports arbitration court decision. International sports arbitration court verdict: Anderson and other seven games in Sydney in 2000 U.S. women and women’s relay name players will gain 4 x 100 olympic medals, 4 ×400 meters, the international Olympic committee(ioc) because of its female flyer Marion. Jones doping and the relay team scores and canceling the medals.The focus of the controversy is that the case in accordance with the rules, the effective application of the 2000 Sydney Olympic Games because of a member(Marion Jones) admitted to breaking the anti-doping rules and was later disqualified, the track team in the women’s 4 x 100, their scores in the 4 ×400 meters relay should be cancelled, whether medal should be withdrawn. According to the focus, the international sports arbitration court in the trial focused on processing of applicable laws, rules, what kind of retroactive and CAS precedent.Through constant practice, the international sports dispute settlement mechanism on the rules apply gradually formed unique principles and patterns, including sports organization autonomous rules shall prevail, general legal principle applies in the alternative, conditions of national law to apply. At the same time, the rules of sports autonomy applicable scope is limited, priority rules in the development of sports autonomy system, the only sports organizations in the statutes, rules, or the provisions specified in the code, can be regarded as the text for reference. On different versions of applicable rules, law is not retroactive principle as a general rule, transitional or across time and space by "tempus regit actum" principles of jurisdiction and think that any behaviors should be it at the time of the legal adjustment. In other words, the new rules do not trace is suitable for the fact that what is happening before they take effect, but only applies to the future. In CAS arbitration, citing the practice of previous similar decision is very common, even reached to form a DE facto case law. CAS has not officially acknowledged, however, exist in the law applicable to follow the principle of universality of precedent, precedent is only as a selective legal basis. It applies helps to perfect the award to the arbitration tribunal, the applicable law is advantageous to the sports arbitration mechanism on the overall implementation of the consistency and stability, but in terms of the current is not a mandatory constraint of the arbitration tribunal.